This response paper was a review of several articles
covering the development of Berger and Calabrese' Uncertainty Reduction
Theory of Communication written for my graduate Communication Theory course
with Dr. Robert Westerfelhaus.
Uncertainty
Reduction Theory helps offer communication researchers insight to the process
of development of interpersonal relationships by giving researchers a better
understanding of the process by which the process of questions and answers
helps parties to develop understandings and establish relationships.
Originally proposed by Berger and Calabrese (1975) to help examine the
communication processes used by individuals who are getting to know one
another, the theory has undergone considerable analysis of its ability to
predict behaviors, as well as its potential applications. A review of several
journal articles by researchers exploring potential applications for
Uncertainty Reduction Theory outlines their efforts to better determine
effective applications for the theory, as well as understand its limitations,
thus helping to maintain the relevance and utility of the theory in the field
of communication scholarship.
Berger and
Calabrese (1975) propose that declining levels of uncertainty would result in
an eventual decrease in the level of questions and interaction in the process
of relationship development. However, Ayres’ (1979) found the levels of
questions between parties tended to stay about the same, or even increase, as
the levels of trust and confidence between interactants increased. Based on
the outcomes of his studies, in which he compared Uncertainty Reduction Theory
to Altman and Taylor’s Social Penetration theory, he viewed Social Penetration
as better able to predict the long-term development of relationships. While
Ayres felt Uncertainty Reduction was unable was able to accurately predict
behavior in long-term relationships, he held that the theory was able to
accurately able to predict behavior in the encounters of relatively short
duration:
If
uncertainty is relatively high at the beginning of any interaction the
uncertainty principle may be used to explain interaction patterns in
encounters rather than in relationships. (p. 200)
Gudykunst
(1985) reached the same conclusion as Ayres (1979) regarding the theory’s
problems with predicting long-term relationship development. He reported the
findings of his own studies into interpersonal relationship development as
being more consistent with what was predicted by Social Penetration theory
than with Uncertainty Reduction. His studies showed Uncertainty Reduction was
most effective with initial interactions, and declined in effectiveness as
uncertainty between individuals was reduced. Gudykunst was also concerned
that research in Uncertainty Reduction had focused largely upon applying the
theory in a narrow range of contexts, mostly involving initial interactions
and romantic relationships, and called for a broader range of research into
applications for the theory:
Research to
date on uncertainty reduction theory has focused upon specific contexts (i.e.,
initial interactions or romantic relationships) with few comparisons across
types of relationships. This research, with rare exceptions, also has been
limited in that it has focused upon the influence of only one type of
similarity; namely, attitude similarity. (p. 203)
Another step
forward in the development of Uncertainty Reduction Theory was the
identification and examination of the role played by dialectical tension
between certainty and uncertainty in relationships by Neuliep and Grohskopf
(2000). The findings of their research suggested interactants often placed
minimum and maximum thresholds on uncertainty management and once outside of
those limits. When outside of their limits, they would often experience
increased levels of discomfort and communication dissatisfaction. They found
that too much uncertainty resulted in higher levels of communication
dissatisfaction, and that too little uncertainty often made conversations
uninteresting, with a resulting decline in interaction between participants.
Goldsmith (2001) expanded upon these findings by Neuliep and Grohskopf (2000),
when he found that individuals studied often preferred some degree of
uncertainty, and in some cases, even acted to maintain or increase levels of
uncertainty:
Problematic
integration theory and uncertainty management theory have shown that the
desire to reduce uncertainty is but one orientation to the experience of
uncertainty. Individuals take into account not only the certainty or
probability of some occurrence but also its valence, and so in addition to
reducing uncertainty, individuals may seek to increase, maintain, or endure
uncertainty. (p. 516)
Neuliep and
Grohskopf (2000) viewed the theory as best when used in conjunction with other
theories, viewing the theory as most effective when used to study the early
stages of interaction. Along with Ayres (1979) and Gudykunst (1985), they
held the theory was more effective when used to examine the development of
short-term relationships, such as job interviews and visits to doctors, where
both parties needed to reach certain communication goals which were critical
to making decisions in relatively short period of time. Goldsmith (2001)
shared their position, and viewed the theory as valuable when used along with
other theories to examine various aspects of the interpersonal communication
process, he cautioned researchers that uncertainty reduction may sometimes
conflict with other communication objectives between individuals. He warned
researchers to consider these potentially-conflicting communicative
objectives, as well as the problems they could create, in better predicting
the outcome of uncertainty reduction.
In spite of
the initial questions about the focus of the theory, and its initial
unreliability in effectively promoting better understanding of developing
interpersonal relationships, the theory was still viewed as valuable, even by
those who wrote about its shortcomings. While Goldsmith (2001) was one of
those who noted the theory had a mixed record of success in predicting
behaviors, he observed that Uncertainty Reduction still maintained a high
level of interest among researchers and himself felt the theory had its value
to communication research:
Clearly, one
of the greatest contributions of uncertainty reduction theory has been its
heuristic value in direction our attention to the role of uncertainty in
various communication situation and to practical concerns with how individuals
manage uncertainty in problematic situation. (p. 514)
The careful
examination of the applications and identifications of the limitations of
Uncertainty Reduction theory since the theory was first proposed by Berger and
Calabrese (1975) have helped to refine the theory and define the theory’s
boundaries. In doing so, these collective efforts have helped make the theory
an effective tool for the examination and improved understanding of the
initial phase of interpersonal interaction.
References
Ayers, J. (1979). Uncertainty and social penetration theory expectations
about relationship communication: A comparative test. The Western Journal
of Speech Communication, 43, 192-200.
Goldsmith, D.J. (2001). A normative approach to the study of uncertainty and
communication. Journal of Communication, 51(3), 514-533.
Gudykunst, W.B. (1985). The influence of cultural similarity, type of
relationship, and self-monitoring on uncertainty reduction processes.
Communication Monographs, 52, 203-217.
Neulip, J.W., & Grohskopf, E.L. (2000). Uncertainty reduction and
communication satisfaction during initial interaction: An initial test and
replication of a new axiom. Communication Reports, 13(2), pp#5.
Got
something to say? Email me!
